Thanks for the memories!

Great movie. Not sure what people expected but I found it highly entertaining.

The film never slows down or bores, plunging from one harrowing sequence to the next.

All of these films share one commonality, that being a kind of emotional center that humanizes a cast of monsters.

"Dracula's Daughter" is a disappointing sequel to both the 1931 film and to Bram Stoker's novel. Although it begins where the 1931 "Dracula" ended, at Carfax Abbey after the killing of Dracula, and it ends where that film began, at the Transylvanian Castle Dracula, most of what happens in between is antithetical to the spirit of either the "Dracula" film or novel. There's no Bela Lugosi. The only actor and character from the 1931 film has a minor role and is inexplicably renamed from "Van Helsing" to "Von Helsing." And Stoker's novel about faith and a female leader and surrogate storyteller (in the Mina character) is turned into one of pseudoscience and a female vampire largely reduced to a damsel-in- distress stereotype stuck between the wills of two men (the shrink and the dead Dracula, as aided by the living Sandor).This is essentially the same misogynist tripe, brought even more to the forefront, that the 1931 film did to the Mina character, where two men, Dracula and Van Helsing, had a contest of wills for her soul. At least, that film kept some of Stoker's religion. This time, the Countess tries to exorcise her father's body with a cross, but after that fails, and she continues to be haunted by him, she turns to psychiatry—specifically one male psychiatrist, who specializes, of course, in hypnosis. It's the Madonna and the Whore dichotomy once again, and when the Countess submits to being the "bad" one in the end, she's punished by the scorned man penetrating her with an arrow. (Interesting that they show this and didn't show a man staking another man in the first film.)Too bad, too, because this sequel has some things going in its favor. There's good atmosphere in parts, highlighted by the fog and musical score. Gloria Holden is a worthy successor to Bela Lugosi. She bares no physical resemblance to him, nor similar acting style, but she's convincing as Dracula's daughter because she shares an eerie aura about her. And she paints and plays piano. It doesn't suffer as much from the early-talkie staginess of its predecessor. And the homoeroticism when the Countess preys on a female victim is more explicit than Dracula's predation of Renfield in the first film. Otherwise, the psychiatrist is a jerk. He expresses his shock over a female not having the vanity of 20 mirrors in her flat. He demands that women fondle his tie and, then, demeans them when they don't do it correctly. Good thing he's not a Freudian.The vampire-meets-psychiatry premise is ripe for parody; unfortunately, however, this film plays it straight. Years later, the Dracula parody "Love at First Bite" (1979) realized that pseudoscientific shrinks (in that case, a Freudian) are the most gullible and so readily and enthusiastically believe in vampires. "Dracula's Daughter" is more pretentious, so we listen to characters rattle on with a straight face for a while regarding the "modern science" of the magic of hypnosis and some other misplaced notions that make about as much scientific sense as Stoker's blood transfusions performed without regard to blood types. After the bumbling bobbies, most of the comic relief here comes from the screwball-type banter between the shrink and his secretary, but even this comes off as mostly mean spirited. Meanwhile, cinema's first sympathetic vamp is little more than a misogynistic trope.(Mirror Note: Besides the hypnosis machine, the only mirror shots are of a man fiddling with his tie. Figures.)

Pleasant surprise. I expected horror in 30's style and got decent drama instead. This movie is not similar to most of the classic horrors from that era. It's just an hour long, there's very little action and no special effects at all. Nothing spectacular, but very enjoyable to watch. It has good atmosphere and it is not tiring at all. I really enjoyed it and, however silly it could sound, I think it's better than famous Dracula from 1931, which is direct prequel to this movie (Daughter begins with ending scene of Dracula).7,5/10

Give props to Lambert Hillyer and Garrett Fort for following up from the first Dracula with a well-planned sequel that takes place pretty much directly after the original. They pulled it off too only bringing back one central actor, Edward Von Sloan, who didn't exactly have the biggest role. The new stars include Otto Kruger, who was a strong lead and also Gloria Holden are new villain. The writing for Holden's character, Countess Zeleska aka Dracula's Daughter, was more sympathetic than ominous, which in my mind wasn't really the right portrayal to make. A darker female vixen would have been an extremely effective move and added a bit of an excitement factor that the film was missing.Another aspect of the film which I thought might have been played out a bit more was a backstory about the daughter and Dracula's relationship. Not having that connection is kind of a missing element of the story-line but not having one at all is probably better than if it was overdone. Dr. Garth himself was a well-developed witty character and interesting protagonist, the type we rarely see, which has doubts about the adversary. Dracula's Daughter has its pros and cons just like any other film but from as a classical horror film perspective it's still a viable watch.

This a sequel to Dracula (1931) and it is great. It is very scary. It has a great story line. It also has great acting. It also has great special effects. If you like scary movies then you need to see this movie. Van H.e.s.l.i.n.g must now fight Dracula's Daughter. This movie is very intense and dark. I like it. If you like scary movies you will like it to. Dracula (1931) is a little bite better. But still this is a great movie. It is a must see. I need more lines and I am running out of things to say. Great movie great movie great movie great movie great movie. Very scary very scary. This movie is a must see. Very scary very scary very scary.